Meido wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2020 11:37 pm
Dgj wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2020 8:52 pm
If we accept innate enlightenment as fact then the whole discussion is moot when you really think about it. Technically so is all practice. As Dogen noted
As I study both the exoteric and the esoteric schools of Buddhism, they maintain that human beings are endowed with Dharma-nature by birth. If this is the case, why did the Buddhas of all ages — undoubtedly in possession of enlightenment — find it necessary to seek enlightenment and engage in spiritual practice?
Innate does not = actualized.
Dogen's words that you quote here are precisely the question that drove him to practice so intensely, awaken to his nature, and promulgate Zen teachings in Japan. The answer to that burning question at which he arrived has already been mentioned:
shusho ichinyo 修証一如, "Practice and [its] confirmation/proof are one." In other words: although each of us is indeed endowed with the dharmakaya wisdom, lacking nothing that must be sought elsewhere, in fact it is practice that confirms or proves this.
A dharma friend elsewhere has expressed this in a more colloquial manner: "The proof is in the pudding."
That is a theoretical way to describe it. From the standpoint of practice itself, I described it in my post above: practice and its confirmation are one because genuine practice is itself the embodied manifestation of awakening.
I believe that a poor translation of shusho ichinyo often seen in the west - "Practice IS enlightenment!" - is the cause of much confusion. Practice is certainly not moot. It is rather something at which it is entirely possible to fail, thus wasting one's precious human life. Dogen's own practice, and his concern with his student's practice, demonstrate that he certainly did not think it moot or useless.
The state of "all is practice" exists for the person who has in fact actualized the state of effortless, all-is-practice. But for someone who has not, such sayings are useless at best, and at worst can lead one down false paths into a kind of conceptual pollyanna-ism ("everything is fine as it is, no need to do anything"), dead practice absent signs of fruition ("just sit there"), or nihilism ("nothing can be accomplished anyway"). A good teacher is crucial for all these reasons, and will ensure that the student does not confuse talk of "non-seeking" with having no aspiration, vows, and intent.
As I am a Rinzai Zen practitioner it's perhaps unseemly for me to go on like this in the Soto forum, so I'll stop (and it may be not all Soto folks will agree with what I've written here). Anyway, there are certainly misunderstandings of Rinzai practice as well that are just as common.
Matylda wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 11:15 am
yes shikan taza could be done wrong, no question or doubt about it.
What Meido Roshi kindly explained is indeed true and correct.
One should be well versed in Fukanzazengi, since it explains the whole matter.
For more detailed explanation one may read and receive proper instructions in Zazen yojinki by Keizan Zenji.
Fukan zazengi has very clear strucure, it starts with basic DO MOTO ENZU, and is alternated by instruction which are relative on how to practice zazen correctly.
As said before poor translation and poor interpretation of Shu/Sho as practice is enlightenment leads to wrong practice of zazen, which is lifeless, fruitless and far from Shu/Shoo in fact. One may simply misunderstand that sitting in zazen IS satori itself. Then what to do? This is simply nihilistic view
Thank you. I understand your points and it seems you are stating what is true according to Zen doctrine. I am clearly the one with lack of understanding so I'm not trying to argue lol!
That said, it still seems paradoxical. Either everyone is Buddha nature, already enlightened, etc. Or they're not.
Broadly speaking, from the Mahayana perspective, we can have statements like this that are considered true:
The worldly passions are precisely enlightenment
Birth and death are precisely nirvana.
-Stone, Jacqueline (1 May 1995). "Medieval Tendai hongaku thought and the new Kamakura Buddhism: A reconsideration". Japanese Journal of Religious Studies
To dial it back seems to create some problems and once we're there we may as well go back to the Theravada understanding where enlightenment must be reached through practice precisely because it is not innate.
In Zen, enlightenment is instantaneous and innate. Per Shen Hui practice doesn't even make any sense (see the paper "The Problem of Practice in Shen Hui's Teaching of Sudden Enlightenment" by Hoyu Ishida). Since Shen Hui was articulating the Zen of Hui Neng, who all modern Zen traces their lineage to, and who was the true sixth patriarch and legitimate heir of Bodhidharma, this seems a relevant issue.
To say one must do a practice, and do it correctly no less, to see innate enlightenment appears counter intuitive and paradoxical.
In a non dual, all is Buddha, all is enlightened world, there truly would be nothing whatsoever to do, as articulated by many Zen masters. For example:
The master addressed the assembly, saying, “Followers of the Way, as to Buddhadharma, no effort is necessary. You have only to be ordinary, with nothing to do—defecating, urinating, wearing clothes, eating food, and lying down when tired.
-Linji
My advice to you is, take a rest and have nothing to do. Even if that little blue-eyed barbarian, Bodhidharma, should come back here and now, he could only teach you to do nothing. Put on your clothes, eat your food, and move your bowels. That's all. No life-and-death [cycle] to fear. No transmigration to dread. No nirvana to achieve, and no bodhi to acquire. Just try to be an ordinary human being, having nothing to do.
- Hsuan Chien
Now, of course many Zen masters also recommend some degree of practice. I'm merely illustrating the points that led to my question in the first place. It seemed to me that Dogen had answered this paradox of practicing to reach something you already have by delineating a Zazen that is not a practice at all. And if it's not a practice, but rather is simply our innate enlightenment, how can it be done wrong?
Don't assume my words are correct. Do your research.
"Quarrel with the evidence of everyday experience, and afterward we will rely on the winner."
-Chandrakirti